How Historically Accurate is the Battle in Barry Lyndon? | Portraying Linear Combat in Film

Comments · 805

• JH

  @JH-lw9et · 4 years ago (edited) · pinned

  Brandon, this is a great video and I love it.<br><br>I agree with you on the bayonet part - the rear ranks should recover arms, while the front rank charge the bayonets in the manner you described. This is a by the way a relic of pike warfare.<br><br>It&apos;s however not completely unimaginable for them to use the method described in the 1764 manual, as some regiments experimented with this more modern stance. The Treatise on discipline for the Norfolk Militia for example advocates its use.<br><br>As someone who is greatly interested in the niche topic that the Seven Years&apos; War is, I only have to criticise one tiny aspect of this video:<br><br>Most British regiments had laced coats during the Seven Years&apos; War, but by no means all.<br><br>A few famous examples of regiments lacking them would be the 60th, (Royal American), 41st (Royal Invalids) Regiments of Foot.<br><br>The 84th (Royal Welsh Volunteers; commonly referred to as Vaughan&apos;s) Regiment of Foot also lacked facings too.<br><br>The 81st (Lord Lindores&apos; Invalids), 82nd (Parker&apos;s Invalids), and 95th (Burton&apos;s) Regiments of Foot probably lacked facings too but the information on their uniform is a little sketchy.<br><br>Since Gale&apos;s Regiment, the Regiment Barry joined, is purely fictional, I have no issues with it.<br><br>Notes for the Napoleonic wars buffs jumping at me:<br>The 95th Regiment I am talking about was disbanded some time after the war ended (1765 IIRC) and has no connection to the Rifle Regiment you think of. <br><br>The 60th Regiment was also just a regular formation, but just as during the Napoleonic wars, they had an unusual amount of battalions.

  386

• JL

  @jlworrad · 4 years ago

  I’ve always sensed Kubrickian irony with the mention the skirmish appears in no history books, a quiet but playful admission the thing is entirely a fiction.

  428

• HU

  @huntclanhunt9697 · 4 years ago

  To be fair... &quot;Not recorded&quot; could just mean practically no info.<br><br>&quot;3rd Regiment engaged enemy rearguard and broke through enemy. 22 casualties.&quot;<br><br>Could very easily be lost to history, and is hardly a detailed account.

  496

• WH

  @whensomethingcriesagain · 2 years ago

  I always figured &quot;not recorded in any history books&quot; meant that this specific skirmish was considered too small to be mentioned in future sources like textbooks, essays, and other major records. Everyone remembers Wolfe at Quebec, but nobody thinks Barry in some nameless orchard

  23

• WA

  @warlordofbritannia · 4 years ago

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0FBIwBsW0k&amp;t=240">4:00</a><br>I’m sorry Brandon, but I can never forgive you for that error—there were no elephants at the Battle of Pelennor Fields, what the Easterlings had there were <b>oliphaunts</b>

  325

• BA

  @babyinuyasha · 4 years ago

  The speed of the French volleys is quite coincidental, they just didn&apos;t want to take up so much time showing the men reload, it would have been a much longer scene

  170

• PE

  @peteroconnell6964 · 4 years ago (edited)

  Kubrick&apos;s attention to detail re: combat is reinforced in his masterpiece &quot;Dr Stangelove&quot; throw away scene where airbourne infantry overwhelm airbase security forces, one of the most realistic enactments of combat in movie history.

  169

• MI

  @michaelsinger4638 · 4 years ago

  My guess as to why so many films don’t have a lot of yelling and commands is that filmmakers are really into emphasizing the sounds of the drums, fifes, boots marching over the ground, etc. &nbsp;And they think a bunch of men yelling commands gets in the way of that.<br><br>Also from a film perspective, where the audience needs to see what is happening, they probably don’t want a full black powder charge and the ensuing smoke potentially getting in the way of that. &nbsp;But that is just my theory anyway.<br><br>It would be interesting to see a film try and more accurately capture how noisy, chaotic, and nasty an 18th Century battle could get. &nbsp;<br><br>The opening scene from the movie Glory does a pretty good job of kind of doing that (however that was a Civil War film which begins with the battle of Antietam in 1862 of course).

  137

• NO

  @nonamesplease6288 · 4 years ago (edited)

  The other thing I liked about the regimental flag. Since the regiment wears white facings, their regimental colors would also be white. White regimental colors had the red cross on them. Others regiments faced with actual colors ( yellow, green, etc...) did not have the red cross on their regimental flags. This was a nice detail.

  62

• MI

  @michaelsommers2356 · 4 years ago

  When judging his historic fidelity you have to ask whether Kubrick was trying to be true to history, or to Thackeray&apos;s novel. &nbsp;I&apos;m pretty sure that if the novel contained something ahistorical, Kubrick would have kept it in, history be damned. &nbsp;Remember that the novel was written over eighty years after the events it portrays, about the same time as between now and WWII. &nbsp;How good was Thackeray&apos;s knowledge of the war, given that there were no newsreels, no photographs, no sound recordings, and few memoirs.<br><br>Also, Thackeray was primarily a satirist, and the novel is picaresque. &nbsp;Absolute historical fidelity was not high on his list of objectives.<br><br>Finally, remember that the movie was made in a time when the only way to see a movie was in a theater. &nbsp;No freeze frame. &nbsp;No watching the same scene over and over. &nbsp;The wrong fabric or firelock would only be seen fleetingly, once, and never again.

  277

• JO

  @JosMorn1 · 3 years ago

  If I may add... Drummers and fifers were NEVER in the front ranks on the battle field. &nbsp;They were there to relay signals, and providing the opportunity to be shot first was counter-productive at the very least. &nbsp;They did march the units TO the battle field, butt then were retired to get out of the way and fulfill their job when called upon, and almost never played airs during the battle as it would confuse the signals. &nbsp;So while it is a rather effective tool for drawing the emotion of the movie goers, it is also an anachronism to see them march across the field of battle in the front lines and for paying during the battle like a juke box at the fights!

  58

• OT

  @ottofin3178 · 4 years ago

  I am so glad you&apos;re able to appreciate the scene in the right context, talking about how it fits in with the rest of the movie. Also, epic sponsored message 👍🏼

  111